Slashdot Mirror

Why can't the system just generate hydrogen from my electricity and tap water?

It could, and you can buy systems that do that (well, that use deionized water instead of tap water). My guess is that they did some analysis and determined that just chemically converting natural gas (which is mostly methane) is cheaper than using electricity.

A hell of a lot of batteries? How about a regenerateive fuel cell? Check out this cool diagram which illustrates that fuel cells are reversible. Some day we'll all have something like this in our basement.

A hell of a lot of batteries? How about a regenerateive fuel cell? Check out this cool diagram which illustrates that fuel cells are reversible. Some day we'll all have something like this in our basement.

I assume you've conceded my point that, discounting regulatory and insurance issues, nuclear power *IS* cheaper to produce than wind

I most certainly have not.

You are telling me that catastrophy insurance costs nothing because there have thus far been no outlays, yet you are unwilling to accept the free-market commercial cost of such insurance as a subsidy. The essential contradiction of your position is clear.

You also have no apparent respect or concern for the externalities, such as waste disposal, weapons proliferation, or the human cost of the potential catastrophies which are so great that the market alone is unwilling to bear them.

Alternative forms of power (like wind) have DIRECT subsidies, in the form of lucrative tax credits

As well they should, since extracting wind energy from the atmosphere is a direct form of greenhouse gas mitigation. Mining uranium uses fossil fuel.

you didn't bother to address the other issues, such as the intermittent and unreliable nature of wind power

I'm sorry. I already addressed this by explaining hydrogen storage using proton exchange membrane-based electrolysis and fuel cells several times on this story, but apparently not in this comment thread.

you're just shilling for the wind power companies.

Ha! I wish someone was paying me for this. I have no financial interest in any wind power companies. Not for want of trying, though. Why are there no U.S. stocks or mutual funds devoted primarily to wind power? There are lots of private companies that take a minimum $1M ("accredited") investment. Why hasn't someone made a mutual fund out of those yet?

But here on Slashdot, I'm in it for the karma.

How do I know you aren't shilling for the nuclear business?

Perhaps the electrolysis uses a fuel cell running in reverse?

www.protonenergy.com/index.php/html/energysystems/ home

I'm aware of two economic methods of generating H2. The least economic is from cracking water using electricity (the topic of this article). The most economic is by cracking natural gas - this is the method used by everybody I know of in the chemical industry.

Consumption of fossil fuels is very rapidly becomming uneconomic. Not only do they pollute, but we have already used more than half our petroleum. Perhaps you have noticed the oil wars that used to be impending?

Proton exchange membrane hydrogen electrolysis systems are about 50% efficient. The most heavily subsidized and poorly-insured nuclear power runs about US$0.12 per kilowatt hour, whereas wind power is already under $0.03/kwh. Therefore, wind-based electrolyzed hydrogen already costs less than nuclear-based hydrogen.

Plus, the new wind turbine models can power the entire U.S. in only 14,000 acres.

I need to check Howard Dean's web site to make sure he knows all this. As if it wasn't inevitable anyway.

Nobody said the hydrogen was free!

True, yet, proton exchange membrane hydrogen electrolysis systems are about 50% efficient.

The most heavily subsidized and poorly-insured nuclear power runs about US$0.12 per kilowatt hour, whereas wind power is already under $0.03/kwh. Therefore, wind-based electrolyzed hydrogen already costs less than nuclear-based hydrogen.

I need to check Howard Dean's web site to make sure he knows all this. As if it wasn't inevitable anyway.

Power cells will be always more difficult to operate and heavier than jet engines. No matter what the fuel (not hydrogen, to be sure)

On the contrary, the sustained altitude record is already held by a craft which has recently been fitted with a fuel-cell based energy storage system in preparation for this Summer's overhight 50,000 ft. flight.

If I were a betting man, my money would be on wind power and fuel cell storage systems.

How many acres does it take to hold that many wind turbines?

Well, first off, as someone else pointed out, I should have said 1.5 million turbines, not 150,000, so as not to assume constant peak output as I had mistakenly done. However, each one of those turbines takes only 36 square meters, meaning that all 1.5 million would take less than 14,000 acres, or about as much oak forest that is lost each year in California alone, or less than twice the area of the Stanford University campus.

That power costs about 4 cents per killowatt hour, compared to 3 cents for poorly-scrubbed coal (compared to European scrubbing standards, which result in 4 cents/kwh), anywhere from 7 to 15 cents per kilowatt hour for natural gas (depending on market rates with occasional shortages) 11 cents/kwh for nuclear (plus hidden externalities for waste disposal). In other words, it's the best deal around.

How many of them need to be running at capacity at one time to power the entire U.S. electrical grid?

Right, you hit the nail on the head for the 150,000 figure. Again, I should have said 1.5 million for average output values. The occasional drop caused by widespread windlessness could be backed up by hydroelectric power stations, or storage systems.

Electrolysis is good to play with in the physics labs at school, but when it comes to produce very large quantities of Hydrogen for mass consumption it's worth practically zero.

Nonsense. Electrolysis is already in commercial use. As catylitic electrolysis (fuel-cell-in-reverse) methods are discovered, the process will become even less expensive. At least, we won't know until we try, and electrochemistry is a vastly under-explored field. Fluidized bed electrodes of various organic catylists are numerous, but only a fraction have yet been tried. I need to check the patent literature on the latest electrolysis efficiencies. They have gotten much better than "physics labs at school."

Plus, H-gen equipment can be used to store energy in case of power outage, as many hospitals and some cities do. This means that wind power will quickly become dominant, one way or another.

it would be cheaper to get that hydrogen from gasifying fossil fuels

Fossil fuels are not renewable; therefore, that statement will only be true for a finite time. Who knows how long?

Electrolytic hydrogen production is already in use commercially.

The $100 within 2 days anywhere in US is a premium service. There is nothing to stop you buying an electrolysis kit, some solar panels, and generating your own. Or find a local supplier that will provide cheap bottles of hydrogen. After all, any local business can buy a hydrogen generator. Alternatively you can buy an all-in-one solution the regenerative fuel cell.

Interesting items from the DOE hydrogen faq:

How much energy is required to produce hydrogen via electrolysis of water?

"The energy required to produce hydrogen via electrolysis (assuming 1.23 V) is about 32.9 kW-hr/kg. [...] For commercial electrolysis systems that operate at about 1 A/cm2, a voltage of 1.75 V is required. This translates into about 46.8 kW-hr/kg, which corresponds to an energy efficiency of 70%.

"Most of the hydrogen produced today is consumed on site, such as at an oil refinery, and is not sold on the market. From large-scale production, hydrogen costs $0.32/lb if it is consumed on site. When hydrogen is sold on the market, the cost of liquefying the hydrogen and transporting it to the user must be added to the production cost. This can increase the selling price to $1.00-1.40/lb for delivered liquid hydrogen. Some users who require relatively small amounts of very pure hydrogen (such as the electronics industry) may use electrolyzers to produce high-purity hydrogen at their facilities. The cost of this hydrogen, which depends on the cost of the electricity used to split the water, is typically $1.00-$2.00/lb."

My fuel cell Segway will leave your old battery model at the lights.

Phillip.
http://www.FutureEnergies.com/

On their site they have pictures of what a fuel cell vehicle gas station upgrade will look like -- very cool!

On their site they have pictures of what a fuel cell vehicle gas station upgrade will look like -- very cool!